Fred N. Martinez v. Susan K. Deeter
2012 Ind. App. LEXIS 258
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Fred Martinez and Susan Deeter divorced in 2002; Mother was custodian of three children, Father obligated to pay child support.
- Mother’s disability led to Social Security benefits; later, Survivor benefits for the children were received after Mother remarried.
- In 2007, the parties entered an Agreed Entry: Father would pay $387/week, using $100,000 as Father’s annual income for calculation of irregular income.
- Father’s 2007 income exceeded $318,000; excess income of $218,157.93 used to compute additional support, with disputed tax-rate adjustments.
- In late 2007, Father’s earnings and custody shifted for the oldest child; multiple evidentiary hearings followed through 2011 on various issues.
- Trial court found survivor benefits should be included in Mother’s gross income, calculated arrearages, and awarded post-secondary education cost allocations; also addressed attorney fees and payment sequencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 irregular income calculation for Father | Martinez argues improper calculation of 2007 irregular income and misapplication of tax rate. | Deeter contends court properly used irregular income method with admissible evidence and compliant with guidelines. | Remand for recalculation using permissible method (percentage-based) consistent with guidelines. |
| Inclusion of survivor benefits in Mother's income | Martinez asserts survivor benefits for children should be included in Mother's gross income. | Deeter argues survivor benefits for children should be included under a different provision or not at all. | Survivor benefits for the children not includable in Mother's weekly gross income; remand to impute disability benefits for children. |
| Attorney fees in the modification | Martinez contends trial court should award Mother attorney fees due to conduct and costs. | Deeter argues discretion lies with trial court and denial was proper given conduct and costs. | Court's denial of attorney fees affirmed. |
| Order to pay arrearage first to attorneys | Martinez challenges trial court’s order directing payment of arrearage to Mother’s attorneys. | Deeter contends the order was appropriate or at least not properly supported by authority. | Remand to establish authority and clarify lien/payment mechanism before withholding funds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Young v. Young, 891 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2008) (trial court’s child support calculation is presumptively valid; abuse of discretion standard)
- Sexton v. Sedlak, 946 N.E.2d 1177 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (abuse of discretion standard; findings reviewed under Rule 52)
- Redd v. Redd, 901 N.E.2d 545 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (attorney fees discretion; factors for award)
- Borum v. Owens, 852 N.E.2d 966 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (proportional contribution principle for postsecondary education expenses)